What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important?
The relationship between date of first description and size, geographic range and depth of occurrence is investigated for 18 orders of marine holozooplankton (comprising over 4000 species). Results of multiple regression analyses suggest that all attributes are linked, which reflects the complex int...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | JOUR |
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00301299_v109_n3_p567_Gibbons |
| Aporte de: |
| id |
todo:paper_00301299_v109_n3_p567_Gibbons |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
todo:paper_00301299_v109_n3_p567_Gibbons2023-10-03T14:39:48Z What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? Gibbons, M.J. Richardson, A.J. Angel, M.V. Buecher, E. Esnal, G. Fernandez Alamo, M.A. Gibson, R. Itoh, H. Pugh, P. Boettger-Schnack, R. Thuesen, E. deep water geographical distribution new record range size size vertical distribution zooplankton The relationship between date of first description and size, geographic range and depth of occurrence is investigated for 18 orders of marine holozooplankton (comprising over 4000 species). Results of multiple regression analyses suggest that all attributes are linked, which reflects the complex interplay between them. Partial correlation coefficients suggest that geographic range is the most important predictor of description date, and shows an inverse relationship. By contrast, size is generally a poor indicator of description date, which probably mirrors the size-independent way in which specimens are collected, though there is clearly a positive relationship between both size and depth (for metabolic/trophic reasons), and size and geographic range. There is also a positive relationship between geographic range and depth that probably reflects the near constant nature of the deep-water environment and the wide-ranging currents to be found there. Although we did not explicitly incorporate either abundance or location into models predicting the date of first description, neither should be ignored. Copyright © Oikos 2005. JOUR info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00301299_v109_n3_p567_Gibbons |
| institution |
Universidad de Buenos Aires |
| institution_str |
I-28 |
| repository_str |
R-134 |
| collection |
Biblioteca Digital - Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales (UBA) |
| topic |
deep water geographical distribution new record range size size vertical distribution zooplankton |
| spellingShingle |
deep water geographical distribution new record range size size vertical distribution zooplankton Gibbons, M.J. Richardson, A.J. Angel, M.V. Buecher, E. Esnal, G. Fernandez Alamo, M.A. Gibson, R. Itoh, H. Pugh, P. Boettger-Schnack, R. Thuesen, E. What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| topic_facet |
deep water geographical distribution new record range size size vertical distribution zooplankton |
| description |
The relationship between date of first description and size, geographic range and depth of occurrence is investigated for 18 orders of marine holozooplankton (comprising over 4000 species). Results of multiple regression analyses suggest that all attributes are linked, which reflects the complex interplay between them. Partial correlation coefficients suggest that geographic range is the most important predictor of description date, and shows an inverse relationship. By contrast, size is generally a poor indicator of description date, which probably mirrors the size-independent way in which specimens are collected, though there is clearly a positive relationship between both size and depth (for metabolic/trophic reasons), and size and geographic range. There is also a positive relationship between geographic range and depth that probably reflects the near constant nature of the deep-water environment and the wide-ranging currents to be found there. Although we did not explicitly incorporate either abundance or location into models predicting the date of first description, neither should be ignored. Copyright © Oikos 2005. |
| format |
JOUR |
| author |
Gibbons, M.J. Richardson, A.J. Angel, M.V. Buecher, E. Esnal, G. Fernandez Alamo, M.A. Gibson, R. Itoh, H. Pugh, P. Boettger-Schnack, R. Thuesen, E. |
| author_facet |
Gibbons, M.J. Richardson, A.J. Angel, M.V. Buecher, E. Esnal, G. Fernandez Alamo, M.A. Gibson, R. Itoh, H. Pugh, P. Boettger-Schnack, R. Thuesen, E. |
| author_sort |
Gibbons, M.J. |
| title |
What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| title_short |
What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| title_full |
What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| title_fullStr |
What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: Is size, range or depth important? |
| title_sort |
what determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: is size, range or depth important? |
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12110/paper_00301299_v109_n3_p567_Gibbons |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT gibbonsmj whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT richardsonaj whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT angelmv whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT buechere whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT esnalg whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT fernandezalamoma whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT gibsonr whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT itohh whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT pughp whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT boettgerschnackr whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant AT thuesene whatdeterminesthelikelihoodofspeciesdiscoveryinmarineholozooplanktonissizerangeordepthimportant |
| _version_ |
1782028181897740288 |